Criticism of TV Globo (formerly Rede Globo) refers to the history of controversy concerning TV Globo, the television division of the media conglomerate Grupo Globo, owned by media proprietor Roberto Marinho. TV Globo was founded on April 26, 1965, just over one year after the Brazilian coup d'état by the Brazilian Armed Forces, and operated under the new military dictatorship in Brazil until March 15, 1985. TV Globo was criticized for censorship of pro-democracy broadcasting. In 2013, TV Globo apologised for its support of the military junta in the 1964 Brazilian coup d'état.
Time-Life Although Marinho acquired a broadcast license in 1957, it was a contract with Time Life Television that allowed Rede Globo network to enter and expand in the Brazilian television market. Time-Life offered financial and technical support in return for a share of Rede Globo profits. Marinho's competitors argued this was unjust because it broke Brazil's constitutional laws concerning foreign media ownership. An inquiry found the laws had been broken and Time Life Television was paid out. Marinho was not convicted. Marinho's support for the military junta
In 2013, TV Globo news presenter, William Bonner read on-air during the national evening news, the , a formal public apology for Groupo Globo's support of the 1964 coup.
He read, "In the light of history, ... there is no reason not to acknowledge, today, explicitly, that the support for the 1964 coup was a mistake, as well as other wrong editorial decisions in the period elapsed since that original mistake. Democracy is an unconditional value. And, when in risk, it can only be saved by itself."
In refuting the accusation that was pro-military rule, the group cited the difficulty in obtaining television licenses in João Pessoa and Curitiba in 1978; government censoring of its programming; and the presence of communists amongst its employees."Acusações Falsas" . Memória Globo. 2012. Page accessed on 12 February 2013.PRESTES, Luiz Carlos. "Letter to Aloyzio Neiva", Rio, 16/01/1983, 3 pgs.; original document, typed. (Author's private file)
Government influence Walter Clark, who was a general manager of Rede Globo, wrote in his autobiography that Rede Globo was heavily controlled by the government. For example, at the direction of Rio de Janeiro's chief of police, he had cancelled the programs of Carlos Heitor Cony, a journalist, and Roberto Campos, an economist.
An advisory committee was convened to scrutinize Rede Globo's material. The committee included Paiva Chave and Edgardo Manoel Erikson, both generals. The military president Emílio Garrastazu Médici visited Clark on Sundays to watch football with him. According to Clark, the so-called "Globo standard of quality ended up "going through the looking-glass" of a regime which the Rede Globo professionals never agreed with".Ferreira, Argemiro. "A Globo e a ditadura militar". Observatório da Imprensa. 6 April 2010. Page accessed on 12 February 2013.
In interviews made for the British documentary film Beyond Citizen Kane (1993), the minister for finance in the military junta, Armando Falcão said, "Roberto Marinho never gave me any problems. When I was the minister in charge of censorship and he was the director of the TV Globo network, Radio Globo, Radio Mundial and Radio Eldorado, he never gave me any trouble."
Diretas Já protest
On 25 January 1984, the Rede Globo network broadcast the first large rally of the Diretas Já movement from the Praça da Sé public square of São Paulo. Rede Globo's program had planned a segment on the protests, lasting two minutes and seventeen seconds. However, there was a miscommunication during the transmission to the . 25 January was the foundation date of São Paulo and so the news reader assumed the vision to be broadcast was part of the city's 430th anniversary celebrations. Rede Globo was accused of manipulating the facts."Globo censurou Diretas-Já, diz Boni". Folha de S.Paulo. 31 December 2005. Page accessed on 16 November 2013.
José Bonifácio de Oliveira Sobrinho, known as Boni, the former vice president of , commented on this during an interview with journalist Roberto D'Ávila in 2005. He confirmed that Roberto Marinho suppressed the coverage of the first large rally of the Diretas Já movement. Sobrinho said, "Mr. Roberto did not want mention of Diretas Já" and the event in Praça da Sé would be reported, "without any participation of any of the dissenters". This was in line with the demand of the government censors. The veracity of these facts is rejected in the book, .
Proconsult scheme The Proconsult scheme was an alleged attempt to interfere with the Rio de Janeiro gubernatorial election of 1982 to prevent the election of Leonel Brizola, candidate for the Democratic Labour Party (PDT). On the eve of the election, O Globo published an editorial favourable to Brizola's opponent, Moreira Franco.CASO PROCONSULT: A história da notícia. OBSERVATÓRIO DA IMPRENSA, ISSN 1519-7670 - Ano 14 - nº 343 - 19/1/2010, originally published 22 August 2005. The Proconsult company was engaged by the Brazilian Election Commission to use their computer system to tally the votes. It was alleged that the company awarded all blank, invalid, null, and hanging chad votes to Franco. Furthermore, the Proconsult result did not match an independent exit poll conducted by the newspaper . O Globo did not challenge the count.Fernandes, Hélio. . Tribuna da Imprensa. 2 April 2010. Page accessed on 16 November 2013.
Journalist at the newspaper Hélio Fernandes reported that Maoel Vidal of the Rio de Janeiro Police, as an independent scrutineer, noticed irregularities in the count. Critics allege influenced the result by reporting counts calculated from electoral map aggregate votes.
Purchase of NEC stock Prior to the 1964 coup, the Nippon Electric Company (NEC) was a major supplier of telecommunications equipment to Brazil. Afterwards, when NEC needed to nationalise the stock of its subsidiary NEC Brazil, it ceded shareholder control of the company to Mário Garnero's private equity firm, Brasilinvest.
On 18 March 1985, the Central Bank of Brazil initiated the liquidation of Brasilinvest. Garnero was accused of insufficient liquidity and embezzlement. Garnero was unsuccessful in securing a preventive concordat to avoid insolvency. On 29 April 1986, Minister of Communications Antônio Carlos Magalhães suspended government contracts with Garnero's companies. In response to Brasilinvest's fall, NEC re-purchased part of the NEC Brazil stock.
In December 1986, the Brasilinvest stock was sold. Grupo Globo purchased 51% of the holdings and Garnero kept 25% as preferred stock. NEC purchased 58% of the stock (16% common shares and 42% preferred shares). Government contracts with NEC continued.
In May 1987, Congressman Paulo Ramos sought a commission of enquiry to investigate the sale of NEC Brazil shares to Rede Globo via Garnero. On 17 November 1987, the commission found no fault of Magalhães. The president of the commission, Mussa Demes of the party said, "If Governor Antônio Carlos had acted differently, he would have irrevocably compromised the country's telecommunications system and could be answering today for omission [in his responsibilities]". This was in light of the government having suspended contracts with NEC to prevent Garnero using government resources to stop the liquidation of Brasilinvest.
The state-owned telecommunications company, Telebrás, was broken up and privatised in 1999. The new entities continued their affiliations with western companies for their technological needs. NEC Brazil shares were less attractive and sold their holdings.
TV Aratu On 10 November 1986, Rede Globo cancelled its long-standing contract with TV Aratu, a station in Bahia. TV Aratu ceased broadcasting Rede Globo content on 20 January 1987. TV Bahia, an entity owned by the family of Minister for Communications Antônio Carlos Magalhães, replaced TV Aratu. On 13 January 1987, Congressman Luís Viana Neto, a shareholder in TV Aratu, went to president José Sarney to complain about Magalhãe's apparent conflict of interest.
On 15 January 1987, Judge Luiz Fux provided TV Aratu an injunction on TV Bahia's retransmission of the Rede Globo programming, however, it was dismissed 6 days later. Legal proceedings continued until 6 July 1987 with no success for TV Aratu. Without Rede Globo's programming, TV Aratu's ratings fell by 80%. In 1996, its assets were sold to pay its legal fees.
1989 election debate
Journalist Ricardo Noblat suggested Rede Globo had been biased in its reporting of the 1989 election by favouring the presidential candidate, Fernando Collor de Mello. Collor owned TV Gazeta, a Rede Globo affiliate broadcasting in Alagoas.Noblat, Ricardo. "Collor usa imagens da Globo no seu programa eleitoral". Blog do Noblat. 30 de agosto de 2010. Página acessada em 16 de novembro de 2013. Allegedly, Rede Globo manipulated segments of the pre-recorded final debate before the runoffs between Collor de Mello and Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva of the Workers' Party.Goulart, Alexander. "A mais polêmica edição do Jornal Nacional" . Observatório da Imprensa. 19 February 2008. Page accessed on 16 November 2013. Before the debate, polling suggested the two candidates were equal in the presidential race. When Lula lost, the Worker's Party concluded the televised debate was a confounding factor.
Initially, Rede Globo sought to recuse itself from the mandatory full coverage of the election. However, it went ahead when the tie between candidates became evident. On 15 December 1989, on the eve of the runoff voting, Rede Globo broadcast TV news reports on (News Today) and on (National News). The report was the more controversial of the two, highlighting the better of Collor's moments and the weaker of Lula's. The Workers' Party applied to the courts to invoke the right of reply article of the Brazilian Constitution and have parts of the debate re-broadcast but was unsuccessful.
Rede Globo agreed the broadcast of the debate was not balanced but denied it being intentional. In 2009, Collor said he had been favoured in the debate broadcast by Rede Globo in the contest. However, despite his success in the election, by 1992 Collor had been impeached for receiving kickbacks from the corporate sector.
Defamation of Leonel Brizola
In 1992, Leonel Brizola was the governor of Rio de Janeiro. Brizola had given the broadcasting rights for the 1992 Brazilian Carnival parade in Rio de Janeiro to Rede Globo's competitor, Rede Manchete. On 6 February 1992, O Globo published an editorial piece entitled "Understanding Brizola's Rage" which implied he was suffering from "declining mental health" and "management ineptitude".
In March 1994, under judicial order, aired Brizola's right of reply. Brizola made a written response which was read on-air by the news reader, Cid Moreira. Brizola said he did not recognize as an "authority in matters of freedom of the press" and that the media empire had a "long and friendly relationship with the authoritarian regime and with the 20-year dictatorship that had ruled our country". He said, "Now, I am 70 years-old, 16 less than my slanderer, Roberto Marinho, who is 86 years old. If this is your notion of men of a certain age, then apply it to yourself".
2006 election
Rede Globo provided coverage of the 2006 Brazil election. The broadcaster was accused of reporting in a way that was biased against the re-election campaign of the president Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva."Demitido, repórter acusa TV Globo de manipulação na cobertura eleitoral". UOL. 20 December 2006. Page accessed on 16 November 2013. Rede Globo reporter Luiz Carlos Azenha gave the examples of economic reports favouring Lula being omitted from broadcasts and his negative report about José Serra being censored by Rede Globo.Observatório da Imprensa. Abaixo-assinado frustrado da TV Globo
Gol Flight 1907